Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              7       8       end
  

Archive 2013 · RX1 vs X100S

  
 
ricardovaste
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · RX1 vs X100S


I know there are some who own and/or have used both to some degree, so if you could chime in it would be appreciated .

I'm missing many other points of comparison here, but these are the ones I'd like addressing if possible. My assumptions are:

- X100S has slightly quicker AF
- X100S has better interface for some user preferences (shutter dial, zone focusing easier, shutter priority easier/more pleasant)
- RX1 files are ultimately higher quality throughout the ISO range
- RX1 lens is better corrected, has pop
- RX1 has better DR, better recovery to RAW files, better tonality.

I've read some reviews, but none seem to coincide with both cameras being available together to compare properly. What it comes down to is that in my mind the RX1's full-frame sensor will show it's difference in format, and that "IQ" is a step above. Much like I can clearly see the difference between APS-C and FF with my SLR's, the files and prints seem so much thicker, and tones so much more subtle. But I know the X100S has a different kind of sensor, so is the difference in quality really that great between these cameras? That's a genuine question!

I look at images in broad daylight, like this from Steve Huff, and I love the DR and recovery. Can I get the same from the X100S? What have you found?

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/colorcow.jpg

>> http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/12/03/the-sony-rx1-camera-review/



Jul 01, 2013 at 01:28 PM
rji2goleez
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · RX1 vs X100S


FWIW - I had the x100s for about two months and sold it as I didn't think the images were that much better than the OM-D which I also had at the time. However, when I got the RX1, I was floored at the image quality and characteristics that point out above. Converting RX1 images to black and white is as close to owning a Leica as I will probably ever come. I don't think there is much comparison between the RX1 and the X100s and I am very happy I went in this direction.


Jul 01, 2013 at 02:57 PM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · RX1 vs X100S


I still have both of these cameras, and the functionality between them is pretty similar, for me. There are little things here and there that I prefer in one over the other, but I'd say they're on pretty equal footing in terms of overall usability (at least in how I use them.) The RX1 does feel more solidly built, though.

Ultimately, the difference for me is in the image quality. I'm not someone who needs super shallow DOF all of the time, but I do like being able to isolate the subject from time to time, and the RX1 wide open does have that advantage. I found that f2 with a 35mm on FF is my sweetspot, in terms of balancing speed, size and cost with my M9, and I missed it a little with the X100s.

Outside of that, print/viewing size is such a major factor that it depends on the individual. While X-trans is good for high ISO, I've often been unhappy with the look and artifacts of the files, even compared to my Bayer aps-c cameras, let alone the RX1. If you jive with the X-trans files, the X100s may be a great choice.

p.s. I should also mention that I only paid $2165 for my RX1 on Amazon Warehouse, and I paid $100 over list for the X100s (because I didn't want to wait on one,) so the price difference between the two cameras, for me, wasn't as much as it seems.




Jul 01, 2013 at 03:36 PM
luminosity
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · RX1 vs X100S


The RX1 sensor is a remarkable one by most of the accounts I've heard.

Edited on Jul 01, 2013 at 04:34 PM · View previous versions



Jul 01, 2013 at 03:43 PM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · RX1 vs X100S


I would always get RX1 if I could vs any other fixed lens compact camera.


Jul 01, 2013 at 04:19 PM
stuuke
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · RX1 vs X100S


Based on what I've read I think most people would be very happy with the X100S if they had never shot with the Rx1.


Jul 01, 2013 at 04:33 PM
aleksanderpolo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · RX1 vs X100S


http://www.seriouscompacts.com/f38/sony-rx1-fuji-x100s-comparison-long-18002/


Jul 01, 2013 at 04:44 PM
Jochenb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · RX1 vs X100S


For me it also was between the RX1 and X100s. At the time I already owned the X-E1 so I was used to the X-trans sensor. The RAW issues didn't bother me much.
The X100s has the better user interface, faster AF speed in good light and the great built in hybrid viewfinder. Fantastic camera.
However: the IQ of the RX1 is just unbelievable. The lens and sensor are so good. I just had to buy that camera even though it's much more expensive.
Bottom line is that I would only buy the X100s because it's cheaper, faster and has a great viewfinder. Not because of IQ.



Jul 01, 2013 at 05:27 PM
dovey
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · RX1 vs X100S


I had a weekend with both the XE1 and RX1 side by side, absolutely love the RX1. I had thought that the XE1 would be comparable, not so really.
If you don't have both, then the Xtrans sensor is great, but the Sony is significantly better. Even with the ability to change lenses the RX1 is a better camera to use.
I think that the XE1 will substitute for my 5D2 and L lenses, but cannot compete with the RX1 for quality of images and files



Jul 01, 2013 at 05:57 PM
tobicus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · RX1 vs X100S


If the RX1 had a built in VF, there would be nothing the x100s would have over it besides its looks and weight. But since it doesn't...if you gave me both cameras and said I could only keep one, I'd get the RX1, sell it, buy an x100s, and pocket the cash difference. To me, the RX1's IQ benefits are marginal and outweighed by the lack of a built in VF.


Jul 01, 2013 at 06:45 PM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · RX1 vs X100S


tobicus wrote:
If the RX1 had a built in VF, there would be nothing the x100s would have over it besides its looks and weight. But since it doesn't...if you gave me both cameras and said I could only keep one, I'd get the RX1, sell it, buy an x100s, and pocket the cash difference. To me, the RX1's IQ benefits are marginal and outweighed by the lack of a built in VF.


While I find the IQ of the RX1 to be a major reason to pick it over the X100s, I think even the viewing option differences are more nuanced. While the Fuji's hybrid viewfinder is cool and lower profile, the RX1 has a much better EVF that tilts, a much better LCD, and the OVF in the hotshoe doesn't have any horizontal parallax, so I find the AF just as reliable as the X100s', despite the RX1 OVF being a "dumb" finder.



Jul 01, 2013 at 07:25 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · RX1 vs X100S


Having had a X100 since it was released, and some usage of the X100s, in addition to previously owning a XP1 and just picking up an XE-1 plus being a RX1 owner, here are some thoughts

For the most part your pretty right on in terms of AF, IQ etc

X100s is a little quicker in AF, but not my a huge margin and not in poor light. It can also tend to misfocus sometimes. RX1 is a touch slower overall but its very accurate. Neither cam unfortunately is anything like the OM-D which felt near instant even in low light.

The RX1 is surprisingly fast though in terms of non existent shutter lag, and menu buttons. The Fuji cams all can have a little wait when your accessing image review and such.

X100s feels a little cheap compared to the RX1 as well. RX1 is the most solid camera short of a Leica. Feels like its carved of a solid hunk of metal and the buttons all have a nice solid feeling, much like when closing the door of a luxury car vs a cheaper car as an analogy. X100s feels a little cheap and more plasticy but certainly should still be durable. It looks like a camera from yesteryear but feels a bit more modern in construction if you know what I mean.

X100s obviously has hybrid finder which is great. EVF is pretty decent, but lags a bit. OVF has no lag but can sometimes be confusing with parallex as you may think the AF box is on the subject but actually grabbed the background and such. When shot matters, best to use LCD/EVF

RX1 offers neither option built in, but an external OVF works pretty well since its right over the lens so a little more accurate but again, you don't really know what your getting so its not a tool for precision shooting. The Sony EVF while pricey actually is really nice because not only does it have very high resolution and low lag, but it also tilts. Surprisingly useful being able to shoot from low levels and even just tilt it a few degrees up for comfort.

X100s has a VERY useful 3 stop ND built in. RX1 requires a filter as both lenses wont let you shoot wide open in bright sunlight.

RX1 does have a good advantage when its comes to DR and high ISO, plus the Zeiss lens is much better than the Fuji. The Fuji has a nice classic rendering though and is a good optic. The Zeiss has expected Zeiss color and pop and is sharp edge to edge even wide open. X100s can certainly still produce great images but the lens isn't in the same league .

Your going to get a lot more subject separation from the 35mm Zeiss lens than you are using the 23mm Fuji lens, not just due to sensor size, but the Zeiss focal transition and micro contrast gives more of an apparent "pop".

Both cameras have a sweep pano function, which is useful with fixed 35's, but the Sony version works much better and produces a lot less banding.

Both cameras can take the same filter size, 49mm, but the Fuji is more sensitive to IR and you can even manage handheld IR shots at high ISO which can be fun

Decent cost difference between the two, though you can get a used RX1 for $2200 or less, X100s hard to find even new so $900 or so difference. Good chunk of change but not like you can buy 3 X100's for the cost of just the RX1 these days. Also you are going to pay more for FF 24meg sensor, Zeiss lens etc no way around it.

All and all, X100s is a unique camera with its own look to the files from its sensor and lens. RX1 basically gives very modern files that look like they camera from a high end DSLR with a great lens but in a tiny package.

X100s is great for casual street shooting and such, files look great turned B/W in particular. Its not as good for landscapes as the lens isn't as sharp, has some field curvature, XTrans mushiness at times, and less resolution. RX1 can make a very good landscape camera with some of the best DR and resolution short of a D800 or DP2m, but of course can also do some very nice B/W tonality, street shooting etc.

For me, I hands down like the RX1 but the X100s is a fun camera. RX1 kind of spoils any other cameras for me these days because its such fantastic IQ and in such a tiny package, smaller in fact than the X100s even. Premium to be paid for that though, no forgetting that.

Best to probably handle both if you can though as its a pretty subjective decision overall, and IQ alone isn't the bottom line



Jul 01, 2013 at 08:28 PM
Spyro P.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · RX1 vs X100S


The x100 has a proper OVF and is smaller in the one dimension I'm mostly interested in (depth) and just those two things would make it the better camera for me even if the price tags were the other way round. The fact that it also came with an EVF, split screen focusing, shutter speed dial and built in ND filter didnt harm either.

In terms of IQ one is a full frame sensor with a zeiss lens, the other one is a crop sensor with a depth-conscious lens... there can never be a comparison in output between the two no matter what fuji ever claimed about xtrans. So it all comes down to the differences in usability ie if the things in the first para are relevant to your shooting style, and if not (as is usually the case with most people), RX1 wins hands down. But I had to weigh the benefit of having a photo with better tonality, detail etc vs the risk of having no photo, because, for example, the camera didn't fit in my jacket pocket or the electronic displays were unable to show me the things I can see through an OVF.



Jul 01, 2013 at 09:53 PM
Jochenb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · RX1 vs X100S


very good summary millsart


Jul 02, 2013 at 02:00 AM
ricardovaste
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · RX1 vs X100S


tobicus wrote:
If the RX1 had a built in VF, there would be nothing the x100s would have over it besides its looks and weight. But since it doesn't...if you gave me both cameras and said I could only keep one, I'd get the RX1, sell it, buy an x100s, and pocket the cash difference. To me, the RX1's IQ benefits are marginal and outweighed by the lack of a built in VF.


You've used both? If you look at the OP, this is all I'm interested in. Thanks.



Jul 02, 2013 at 02:29 AM
rji2goleez
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · RX1 vs X100S


Jochenb wrote:
very good summary millsart


+1 Spot on!



Jul 02, 2013 at 07:39 AM
ricardovaste
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · RX1 vs X100S


rji2goleez wrote:
+1 Spot on!


The only part of that summary I dislike is suggesting I need to handle both first, as this isn't really possible. I've handled the X100S in store a while ago, but not the RX1.

It seems for those that have used the RX1 AND X100S, the Sony does seem to be a clear winner in IQ.

My follow up question those people are: Is this purely down to the lens, and detail rendering? Although I like this, it's kind of an expectation, what I'm less sure about is how DR, recovery handle, if there is any difference in tonality that is noticeable.



Jul 02, 2013 at 07:48 AM
Jochenb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · RX1 vs X100S


The Sonnar on the RX1 is fantastic. It just doesn't have any real weaknesses. Sharp at all apertures, great smooth bokeh, great colors/contrast,...
The lens on the X100s is softer and doesn't give you that same smooth rendering of the Sonnar IMHO.
The RX1 also has higher resolution (24MP) and the bayer sensor is better supported by the software companies. It does give you better fine detail. If you're not a pixelpeeper and/or printing very big it's not really an issue though.
The dynamic range and tonality of the X100s are fine. The files from both are really flexible, but the RX1 has the advantage here too.



Jul 02, 2013 at 08:19 AM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · RX1 vs X100S


RX1 sensor is very close (if not same) to A99 one, only difference is lens in front of it. And both are very good. Yea and it has 14-bit output too (for those which like RAWs).


Jul 02, 2013 at 08:50 AM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · RX1 vs X100S


FWIW, and I don't want to start the millionth thread about this, but I can see issues when looking at my X-Trans files at just full screen size on my 23" monitor, and changing raw converters simply meant trading out some types of artifacts for others. Pixel peeping or 100% view not required.

My feelings are basically...

Use/functionality: more or less a tie, depending on your style.

IQ: RX1 by a large margin.

Cost: X100s by a large margin.



Jul 02, 2013 at 08:59 AM
1
       2       3              7       8       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              7       8       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.